Predictors of efficacy of corticosteroid switching from abiraterone plus prednisone to dexamethasone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer / 亚洲男科学杂志(英文版)

Corticosteroid switching can reverse abiraterone resistance in some patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Here, we investigated the potential biomarkers for predicting the efficacy of corticosteroid switching during treatment with abiraterone acetate (AA). We retrospectively analyzed 101 mCRPC patients receiving corticosteroid switching from West China Hospital and Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center between January 2016 and December 2018. All cases received AA plus prednisone as first-line therapy during mCRPC. Primary end points were biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS) and overall survival (OS). The risk groups were defined based on multivariate analysis. A total of 42 (41.6%) and 25 (24.8%) patients achieved 30% and 50% decline in prostate-specific antigen (PSA), respectively, after corticosteroid switching. The median bPFS and median OS on AA plus dexamethasone were 4.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.7-6.0) months and 18.8 (95% CI: 16.2-30.2) months, respectively. Aldo-keto reductase family 1 member C3 (AKR1C3) expression (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.15, 95% Cl: 1.22-3.80, P = 0.008) and baseline serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP; HR: 4.95, 95% Cl: 2.40-10.19, P < 0.001) were independent predictors of efficacy before corticosteroid switching in the multivariate analysis of bPFS. Only baseline serum ALP >160 IU l-1 (HR: 3.41, 95% Cl: 1.57-7.38, P = 0.002) together with PSA level at switch ≥50 ng ml-1 (HR: 2.59, 95% Cl: 1.22-5.47, P = 0.013) independently predicted poorer OS. Based on the predictive factors in multivariate analysis, we developed two risk stratification tools to select candidates for corticosteroid switching. Detection of serum ALP level, PSA level, and tissue AKR1C3 expression in mCRPC patients could help make clinical decisions for corticosteroid switching.

Clinical and oncologic findings of extraprostatic extension on needle biopsy in de novo metastatic prostate cancer / 亚洲男科学杂志(英文版)

This study aimed to explore the clinical and oncologic findings in patients with de novo metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) and extraprostatic extension (EPE) on biopsy. We retrospectively evaluated data on 630 patients with de novo mPCa between January 2009 and December 2017 in the West China Hospital (Chengdu, China), including evaluating the relationships between EPE and other variables and the association of EPE with survival outcomes by the Chi-square test, Kaplan-Meier curves, and the Cox proportional-hazards model. EPE was found in 70/630 patients, making a prevalence of 11.1%. The presence of EPE on biopsy was associated with higher Gleason scores and higher incidence of neuroendocrine differentiation (NED), intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P), and perineural invasion (PNI). Compared with those without EPE, patients with EPE had shorter castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival (CFS; median: 14.1 vs 17.1 months, P = 0.015) and overall survival (OS; median: 43.7 vs 68.3 months, P = 0.032). According to multivariate analysis, EPE was not an independent predictor for survival. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that patients with favorable characteristics, including negative NED or IDC-P status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score <2, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) <50 ng ml-1, had worse prognoses if EPE was detected. In patients with PSA <50 ng ml-1, EPE was a negative independent predictor for OS (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.239, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.218-14.756, P = 0.023). EPE was strongly associated with other aggressive clinicopathological features and poorer CFS and OS. These data suggest that EPE may be an indicator of poor prognosis, particularly in patients, otherwise considered likely to have favorable survival outcomes.

Development and validation of a convenient formula evaluating the value and applicability of medical literature in clinical practice

Evidence-based medicine offers explicit methods to evaluate the evidence grades of literature. However, evidence grades do not meet all the practical needs of physicians. This study is aimed to develop a convenient method for evaluating the clinical value of medical literature from the perspective of the clinician. A literature applicability equation was formulated through the Delphi method and the analytic hierarchy process. A consistency check was used to ascertain the efficacy of the formula. Three senior clinicians assessed 30 articles based on their clinical experiences and subjective opinions, while one independent researcher performed independent assessments of the applicability of 30 articles using the evaluation formula. The literature applicability equation was Y = 3.93X[1] + 11.78X[2] + 14.83X[3] + 44.53X[4] + 24.93X[5], where Y = literature applicability, X[1] = years since publication, X[2] = target question covered or not, X[3] = sample size, X[4] = study type, and X[5] = journal quality. Consistency index [CI] values for the first-level indicator ["literature applicability"] and the second-level indicators ["pertinence and timeliness" and "quality of results"] were 0.0325, 0.0012, and 0.0001, respectively. The weights used to calculate the matrix indicators had satisfactory accordance [random coincidence coefficient = 0.056]. A consistency check for the efficacy of the formula revealed kappa = 0.749 and P < .001. The developed and validated literature applicability evaluation formula may be a useful and convenient tool for identifying clinically valuable medical literature